PubMed Health⌕ Search

PubMed · 10217888

Why is colour naming difficult?

Abstract

A suggestion exists in the child language literature that the meanings of natural kind terms are acquired before the meanings of colour terms. Explanations have typically claimed that object terms are more salient than property terms. Such explanations, however, tend to ignore the fact that natural kind terms refer to categories with sharp, clear boundaries while colour terms refer to categories with unclear or variable boundaries. Nonetheless, there has been little evidence to show that the delay in the acquisition of colour terms arises from these semantic properties. This study compares natural kind and colour naming (and corresponding comprehension) by 48 children, ranging in age from 3;0 to 5;5. The results suggest that, contra the salience view, the apparent delay in colour naming may be explained on solely semantic grounds.

Explore related subjects

Keep this discovery

Explore connections, maps & timelines

BibTeXRIS

N Braisby, J Dockrell. 1999. Why is colour naming difficult?. https://doi.org/10.1017/s0305000998003638

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related citations

[Prognostic factors for cognitive development of very low birth weight premature children].

OBJECTIVE: Very low birth weight premature children often show cognitive development abnormalities. There is scarce information about the outcome of these children at preschool age in Brazil. The objective of the study is to describe the cognitive development of a population of premature newborns and to assess possible prognostic factors for abnormalities. METHODS: A cohort study was conducted in a preschool children population whose subjects were very low birth weight premature babies born between January 1991 and September 1993. WPPSI-R Test was used for cognitive evaluation and it was applied by psychologists. Two cut-offs were set to describe abnormality: scores below 1 and 2 standard deviations (SD). RESULTS: Seventy-nine children aged 4 and 5 years were studied. The mean full WIPPSI-R score was 75.6 (+/-11.9). The incidence of abnormal 1 and 2 SD full score was 77.2% and 32.9%, respectively. After adjusting for the method of delivery, small for gestational age (OR=6.19, 95% CI 1.60-23.86), abnormal cerebral ultrasound exam (OR=5.90, 95% CI 1.04-9.83) and male sex (OR=3.20, 95% CI 1.32-26.35) were predictors of full score <70. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the literature, these children showed a more severe cognitive development impairment. Small for gestational age, abnormal cerebral ultrasound exam and male sex were prognostic factors for worse outcome.

Child Development↗